David Frownfelder: Consensus, not conflict, is needed

Monday

Sep 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM

What does it say about the political atmosphere in our country when the voice of reason is the near-dictator of a semi-ally?

When Russian strongman Vladimir Putin urges restraint on attacking Syria, it does make you stop and think. President Barack Obama’s arguments advocating military action in Syria due to Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of sarin gas on civilians and rebels, did not quite ring true to me. In fact, it reminded me of the Bush administration’s shenanigans that got us involved in two of our country’s longest wars, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The evidence remains fuzzy on whether Assad’s troops used the gas, or if it was done by rebels, many of whom are affiliated with al-Qaeda, in an effort to bring the U.S. into a war they were in danger of losing. Putin’s views should be taken with a handful of salt since his country is profiting from weapons sales to Assad, but he did make valid points when asking the U.S. to wait before launching any kind of attack.

The American public has grown tired of war, as the majority of those polled are against a military option at this time. My opinion of congressional opposition is somewhat skeptical in that I believe some of the Republicans opposing Obama’s proposal are against it simply because it is his plan and they don’t want to be seen giving him any kind of support because that would anger their power base.

The arguments the Obama administration has been making sound eerily familiar to those made in 2003 when Bush administration officials were pushing for war with Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Hussein supposedly had weapons of mass destruction. Those weapons were never found, though Hussein may have smuggled some to Syria, according to some U.S. intelligence reports.

No matter who is in charge, it doesn’t appear Washington has learned anything in the past 10 years. No matter how compelling American leaders feel the evidence is, the most effective tool for warfare is allies.

Teddy Roosevelt’s famous phrase of “walk softly, but carry a big stick” didn’t mean whacking your enemy simply because you could. Possessing the ability to do so, backed by a whole lot of friends, is the best deterrent.

When Operation Desert Storm was carried out in 1990, President George H.W. Bush got international consensus while limiting the scope of the war and its goals. Hindsight said he should have continued on to oust Hussein at that time, but then, as the cliche says, hindsight is 20/20. Still, President Bush followed a path that was well-reasoned and carried out.

President Obama does not seem to have learned the lessons originally forged by George W. Bush in 2003. Committing the U.S. military should be a last resort, and we have not reached that point.

While Assad agreed to turn over his chemical weapons, it remains to be seen if the rebels, who may also have chemical weapons, would so readily agree to hand over theirs. In order to legitimize their cause, they should do so, if they have the weapons.

The question remains who is the enemy and who is the ally. Assad said he is opposed by extremists, while the opposition calls him a dictator. The U.S. has chosen badly in the past, originally backing Hussein and even Osama bin Laden in his fight against the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in the early 1980s.

America needs to stay out of the Syrian situation militarily, while monitoring it politically through the United Nations. Consensus is still the most effective means of settling disputes.---David Frownfelder is a staff writer for The Daily Telegram. He can be contacted at 265-5111, ext. 258, or via email at frownfelder@lenconnect.com.